Asking girls for BBFS

[jalimon]

ive never seen brandy, is that she is a little rough around edges appearence wise, obv looks are very subjective to each person

I have seen her. No offense CPP but I know what I am talking about. In my opinion she is too skinny. She would be perfect with a healthy 10 lbs on her. But appearance (facial) wise she is a stunner really. One of the most beautiful smile of any SP I have seen really. Please do not make assumption with free remarks like this it does not add any good for anyone.

Are you telling me the girls don't lie and that they love fucking guys old enough to be their dads or grandfathers? And that certain members are sex gods?

Haha my friend if you only knew how much these girl dont care!!! You loose any credibility with such comment.

 

[MrProfiteroles]

Firstly, I am really pissed off that somebody made Brandy cry. She is the sweetest of girls.
Secondly, cpp433, yes, everybody lies at times. But when geng1987 rates Brandy's face and body as 5's, then every client who has been with Brandy knows who is lying here.
Thirdly, whether the topic is BBFS or LFK, no means no, even in this hobby. Even if the SP says no to CFS, the client has no right to force the issue; just leave and don't pay. But no still means no.
Fourthly, "rough around the edges"? Very few of us here will ever have the good fortune to date a girl with Brandy's "rough edges". You have no idea, cpp433...

Totally agree and behind you my friend!
And me too I would be "rough around the edges" if I was an SP and someone is lacking respect or being rough with me!
Actually I'll make sure to make him cry instead of him make me cry! :lol:!
I refrain myself to write here what I told you in PM I would like to do to these kind of MF!!!

 

[cpp433]

Your right i have no idea, i CLEARLY said i heard, not seen, read my whole post not just pick out the parts that are convienient, IF this guy did what mike claimed he should be banned from montreal clearly, im just a bit more level headed and less emotional than some of you gents when it comes to some things, it struck me as odd that the bbfs accusation only comes out when he gives a mediocre review, when hes already seen multiple other girls from the same agency with no accusations? When hes admonished some1 for not having respect for a lady on a thread? It begs some questions is what i say, it certainly doesnt clear him by any means

 

[A12B]

You can’t just accuse anybody based on hearsay. MM said ‘we both know’. To me this is a joke because nobody beside these 2 adults know what really happened. There is absolutely nothing here to prove that can convict either geng or the sp. You can’t just go and say he did it. Were you in the room ? I’m fully in line with the Beaver and mattj here. Presumption doesn’t fly in a court of law.
Did we become to a point where negative reviews may turn out to be a bbfs accusation ? If this is the case, this boad is will have all positive reviews - one way street.
My couple of cents worth.

 

[jalimon]

Guys remember this thread is not about bad reviews or white knighting.

This thread is about ass hole asking for bbfs and worse not asking but trying out on girl by removing the condom. This is a sexual assault.

When a girl looks at you and has tears in her eyes explaining to you how a fucking ass hole tried it on her you can only react like me and MrP here.

It fucking happens a lot!

 

[EagerBeaver]

Bottom line is that if geng1987 is guilty of intentionally attempted BBFS, he deserves to be both exposed and banned. If he is not guilty of anything other than poor spelling and grammar, which is not a punishable offense, then he is probably owed an apology by MM and reinstatement of client privileges.

 

[EagerBeaver]

it struck me as odd that the bbfs accusation only comes out when he gives a mediocre review, when hes already seen multiple other girls from the same agency with no accusations?

This statement presupposes that there was no such accusations previously. We do not know that. Agencies do not typically run to MERB and post BBFS accusations when a girl reports BBFS or any bad behavior of any kind by a client. We do not know that geng1987 was not already on "probation" with MM and/or Euphoria for prior bad acts. We do not know that there were or were not prior bad acts. If every agency operated as you presume they should - to run to MERB whenever there is ever any report of a BBFS attempt by a client- they would get little accomplished. Maybe they did on this occasion because they were fed up and enough was enough after an evidently very popular girl was driven to tears.

The one thing I have noticed in the past is that agencies rarely ever post complaints about clients EXCEPT when a client severely upsets a popular agency girl. And then, whether it is BBFS or something else, the agency goes after client in a big way. because you are fucking with their livelihood.

Example (I am not going to mention names but some old timers may recall this): a very well respected senior member of MERB berated a popular agency girl when she showed up for an appointment without a condom. She forgot it. The dude's main sin was a bad temper, but he yelled at the girl, she cried and ran out on him, and if I recall correctly, he posted a bad review on her. The agency's operatives then went after the dude on MERB. Reason why is obvious, he was fucking with the rep of a popular, money making escort. It's no different than if you watch a Yankees game and see Aaron Judge get punched out on a pitch 2 feet outside the strike zone. Judge has a look of disgust on his face and slams his bat. It's guaranteed in such a situation that Yankees manager Aaron Boone (or any MLB manager in that situation) will bound out of the dugout and go after the umpire and maybe get ejected to protect their star player. Because his main man player is being fucked with.

It's no different here.

Maybe there were prior complaints about this client, but MM or Euphoria determined there was insufficient evidence and they chose not to post them and continued to do business with him. We just do not know.

 

[freedom3]

The dude's main sin was a bad temper, but he yelled at the girl, she cried and ran out on him, and if I recall correctly, he posted a bad review on her. The agency's operatives then went after the dude on MERB. Reason why is obvious, he was fucking with the rep of a popular, money making escort.

I disagree with this. I think the reason is that he made a popular escort cry and potentially leave the business. I don't think that Euphoria would worry for a second that geng1987's post would harm Brandy's reputation. She has too many positive reviews and I would guess Euphoria is routinely turning men away because she is already fully booked. Euphoria is worried about Brandy leaving the business, not about men not calling anymore because one out of twenty reviews was bad.

 

[EagerBeaver]

Freedom3,

I think in most cases that you are right- on the rare occasions when agencies have gone after clients on MERB (and especially speaking of Euphoria and Eleganza from memory), it was usually because they thought the girl would be upset enough by the incident to leave the business.

In the incident I posted about above, however, the escort did not leave the business nor was there a concern that she would do so. I think the agency was not happy about someone going after one of their girls for making an honest, absent minded mistake. But I agree with your point applying to the current situation- MM clearly went after geng1987 because it was believed that the situation upset Brandy enough to possibly cause her to leave the business.

 

[EagerBeaver]

On another point, geng1987 has posted a number of reviews of XO agency girls, but none from Euphoria/Mike's Mansion until now. He may not be a regular client for the latter.

This is correct. I reviewed geng1987's posting history which I should have done rather than accept the false statement of another poster that geng1987 had seen a number of Euphoria girls previously. In fact, Brandy was the first girl he ever reviewed from Euphoria. All the others were XO girls when he reviewed them. Therefore the argument coursing through this thread that Euphoria "knew" this guy as a client, but failed to expose him, is simply false and without any basis in the posting history of geng1987. It is a valid question, however, whether there were complaints about him to XO and what they did with that info, if in fact they received it.

 

[matt.j]

I disagree with this. I think the reason is that he made a popular escort cry and potentially leave the business. I don't think that Euphoria would worry for a second that geng1987's post would harm Brandy's reputation. She has too many positive reviews and I would guess Euphoria is routinely turning men away because she is already fully booked. Euphoria is worried about Brandy leaving the business, not about men not calling anymore because one out of twenty reviews was bad.

[...] I'm not trying to absolve geng of what ever he's guilty of but before his posts got merged into the incall thread he had created his own thread and his final post said it was outcall in old port. The entire thing is fishy considering his poor english and MM claims she kicked him out? How does the girl kick the guy out when it was an outcall? Plus where is the proof that geng is the person that tried bbfs? I'm sure unless you're one of the few who likes to regularly post about their exploits I doubt the agencies can put a handle to a client. Geng could've seen her a month or a week ago for all you know. Members are saying to ban him which piques my interest. How do you propose you do that? Does the agency have a picture of geng to pass around? What's stopping geng from changing numbers, booking a hotel/airbnb, or doing more incalls? [...]

 

[jalimon]

The boys don't want to lose their toys so they leave reviews that up-sell certain ladies which explains why some ladies have worked a lot longer than most but only have 1-2 pages of positive reviews.

If you read correctly the subject of this thread it's about asking girl for BBFS. The boy's club here do not want to lose their girl to these jerks. And yes it happens a lot. So we are worried.

[...]

Cheers,

 

[MrProfiteroles]

[...]

But like Jalimon said, this thread is about jerks asking for BBFS!
Don't try to move the spotlight on us instead of Mr. Geng1987 by accusing us of only writing good reviews!!!
The ladies share their body, heart and soul with us and any of them that provide good/awesome services deserve we share our experience with them here on merb!

On the other hand, any assholes that try to commit sexual assault by asking or trying BBFS or any disgusting things to the ladies deserve to have the spotlight on him here in this thread!


MrP aliases Gandalf the white!

 

[jalimon]

[...]

I think what Matt is missing is that this is 2018 and the girls talk. The one I know talk to me. The one you know SSJ talk to you. Same for Mr.P, flyingby, etc... So when we hear the girl talk about all these guys trying bbfs it's no fluke. It does need second guessing. It happens a lot and it's really bad for the hobby. I am telling you a great SP told me she is seriously thinking about simply refusing doggy to any new client her or the agency cannot vouch... It's that bad.

Cheers,

 

[Flyingby]

I cannot believe we even need a thread for this. Guys who try it should be banned. Guys who pm about it should be banned. This should not even be a debate. You idiots who try it ruin a girl for the rest of us

 

[EagerBeaver]

The problem is that posts questioning an agency complaint of BBFS tends to weaken the ability of this community to halt this BBFS practice. Putting the issue of geng1987 aside, and looking at it from the bigger picture, how should the community self-regulate the practice? I think we all agree that a known BBFS seeker should be banned and exposed. However the ability to do that is weakened if every report is questioned as potentially inaccurate. I don’t know the current protocols but in the past Mods banned posters who used posts to ask about or promote BBFS and allowed exposition of posters who attempted it by agency owners. There was at one time a sticky thread on BBFS which included Eleganza famously outing a senior MERBite who later confessed and was permanently banned, by the agency as client and by MERB as poster. That thread seems to have been deleted.

Posts along the lines of Matt.J’s allow all BBFS aficionados to proclaim victory. That should be clear. So you guys need to decide whether the practice needs to be tolerated or not. I am hearing both sides in the recent post. To me it should not be a debate, but it seems to be.

 

[cpp433]

I dont think anyone is debating that, i think the debate is whether this guy is automatically assumed as guilty, not accused on here by the girl or the actual agency she works for, but another agency that is affiliated

 

[UncleBob]

Writing a negative review is a delicate matter especially when this is a girl first negative review and very opposite to her existing reviews.
The neg review should NOT be written with that "Pay Back" attitude as geng1987 did...

His review is short but still has enough hint to be able to identify him for a girl/booker...

I find strange that guys asking for BBFS dare to come post on merb after their misbehaviour like nothing happened...
So accusing publically a guy from asking for BBFS is a delicate matter as well and should not go public without solid proof.

Usually the Mods take care of the followup of such cases by PM'ing both party to have details of their versions.

For me, geng1987 remaining silent on such accusation does not help his case at all.

 

[nycbadboy128]

I am reading ALL the posts here and there are MANY valid points on both sides. My question is...why doesn’t Geng1987 say something already???

 

[EagerBeaver]

I ..why doesn’t Geng1987 say something already???

I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt but silence when there is some expectation that one would speak up makes it difficult to do so. It may be that he is being investigated by the Mods and has deemed it prudent not to respond pending completion of the investigation. As UB mentioned in the past when this or an STD accusation was posted the Mods investigated and shut things down/deleted posts if there was no fire to match the smoke. That doesn’t appear to have happened so it probably means an ongoing investigation.